Express Editorial - Near Instant Inspection

I would like to suggest an Express Editorial submission option. All contributors could be a moment away from a major regional, national or global news story. A few times, I have photographed something which would warrant immediate coverage and I am certain many here have been or will be in similar situations. As of now, the only option I know of is essentially giving the photos to the AP, or news agencies. Many media outlets even solicit photos from the public without compensation.

Editorial inspections here are quick (thank you inspectors), but not quick enough for a breaking event. Coupled with the fact iStock is not a breaking news outlet and new additions to the search can take a couple of days, here is my suggestion. Within the editorial submission page, offer a check box for Express Editorial review. Along with the check box explain this is to be used for breaking news or very current major events only. When a photo is submitted under Express Editorial it would essentially queued for immediate inspection. The iStock inspection team would take a quick look and determine if the photo should go to Getty, nothing more. If passed on to Getty, their process for newsworthy events would take over. If a contributor abused the system there would be a warning and the privilege could be revoked.

I am not suggesting this would be a means to compete with credentialed photographers at planned events (concerts, sports, campaign stops, etc.) I am talking about unrepeatable moments of time, where there may only be one person with a camera.

I realize there are other site issues with much higher importance. However, I see Express Editorial as an added benefit to both the contributor and Getty. I know the chance I would actually use the feature is slim. However, if tragedy, devastation or celebration unfolds in my area, it would be nice to know I have the opportunity to take advantage of my existing relation with Getty Images and make the most of being in the right place at the right time.

If you only read the title I guess your reply would make sense, otherwise you missed the point I was trying to convey. This is not a request for inspection, rather a notification to the inspection team a photo may be worthy of addition to the Getty Editorial collection. I tried to accommodate abuse, by mentioning the privilege could be revoked.

This idea came to me a couple of weeks ago while doing some aerial photography over the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis. In 2007 the bridge collapsed and other than being over the bridge a few years later there was nothing different about the day. While flying over Minneapolis, although unlikely, a bridge could have collapsed, a plane could have crashed a building blown up, etc. These are the images I am referring to, very newsworthy moments of history.

As of now, I don't know where to go with a unique and timely image if I happened to capture something big unfolding. Since there are thousands of us all over the world the chance of someone capturing something big is pretty good. Wouldn't Getty and the photographer rather have an established procedure for an amazing capture. I can only think of two times during my iStock career where I would have used this, once my image ended up on the cover of major newspapers and in magazine articles around the country. It would have been nice to have a way to get my image to Getty for immediate purchase, management and use, rather than gifting it to the AP. I don't think a quick glance two times in six years is going to bog anything down and may just be the conduit for the next famous image.

I will concede, adding additional functionality may not be the best way to go about my suggestion. How about providing us an avenue to contact Getty if the opportunity arises? I see they have a phone number, I guess that would probably be the best place to start.

I uploaded two editorial images this week and was surprised at how quickly they were accepted. Less than 24hrs turnaraound. This one was uploaded on 28th Nov and the approval came through on the 29th. I'm impressed : )

On the point of speed being of the essence, can I also suggest that instead of rejecting an editorial image for " ****punctuation**** " the inspector actually adds the missing colon between date and description? As well as taking less time than creating a customised rejection and allowing the image to join the collection more quickly, such a more helpful approach might come across as less antagonistic and would do wonders during a time when building bridges ought to be a priority.

Posted By allyclark:
On the point of speed being of the essence, can I also suggest that instead of rejecting an editorial image for " ****punctuation**** " the inspector actually adds the missing colon between date and description? As well as taking less time than creating a customised rejection and allowing the image to join the collection more quickly, such a more helpful approach might come across as less antagonistic and would do wonders during a time when building bridges ought to be a priority.

Double check your captions in the future. You're trying to hijack this thread because you got a rejection for a caption? Come on.

Posted By allyclark:
On the point of speed being of the essence, can I also suggest that instead of rejecting an editorial image for " ****punctuation**** " the inspector actually adds the missing colon between date and description? As well as taking less time than creating a customised rejection and allowing the image to join the collection more quickly, such a more helpful approach might come across as less antagonistic and would do wonders during a time when building bridges ought to be a priority.

Double check your captions in the future. You're trying to hijack this thread because you got a rejection for a caption? Come on.

We all make mistakes. And no, I'm not trying to hijack the thread. The thread's about the efficiency of editorial inspections. I think my point is valid here and certainly a more appropriate place than starting a new thread here, or even worse, under Discussion. I'm trying to point the ridiculousness and inefficiency of rejecting a file for a missing colon. Maybe you should follow your own advice and read the post. I couldn't give a flying f**k about it being rejected. I get plenty of them. If it bothered me that much, I'd have alot more posts about rejections than this. But hey if you guys want to look on every post as having an ulterior motive and stick your fingers in your ears, then have a go at contributors, then crack on. And why pick on my post? There are hundreds of others on other threads with more issues than this.